8K by 4K or Octo HD - the real SUHDTV technology - Page 26 - AVS Forum | Home Theater Discussions And Reviews
Forum Jump: 
 51Likes
Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #751 of 839 Old 03-23-2015, 04:26 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Joe Bloggs's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: UK
Posts: 3,114
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 446 Post(s)
Liked: 126
Quote:
Originally Posted by tgm1024 View Post
All film and video industry segments understand this---always have. You don't (ideally) film hoping and praying you don't eventually have to crop or zoom later.
Always have? Even in the pre-digital era? Excluding Super-35 and Super-16 formats (where they would transfer to another film anyway) in the pre-digital era they'd have had to rephotograph the film and losing a generation as well as the PQ loss due to the zoom. Or do you just mean in the days since digital intermediates/digitally shot film/TV?
Joe Bloggs is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #752 of 839 Old 03-23-2015, 04:50 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Joe Bloggs's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: UK
Posts: 3,114
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 446 Post(s)
Liked: 126
Quote:
Originally Posted by jaeelarr View Post
Who and how many people are filming in 8K? Not very many, i can guarantee you that.
NHK is the main one who has been shooting/doing test broadcasts in 7.68K - as well as partnering with the BBC. I don't know of any film companies shooting digitally at around 8K. Maybe the IMAX shot scenes in films (on film) are around that - perhaps they scan at something like that? So film companies film on film in 35mm/IMAX etc. which may sometimes (occasionally) be scanned at 8K - or is that just for archiving? But the TV comanies are the ones actually/who will actually be shooting in 7.68K.
Quote:
Do you know how big a 8K reso file is? TB's.
Not necessarily. eg. if NHK broadcast 2 hours of 7.68K at 100Mb/s (ie. compressed) it would only be around 87.89GB.
Quote:
You would have to house a small data center to achieve editing 8K film on a regular basis.
Well they're going to have 7.68K TV on a regular basis in Japan (maybe other places too?) in about 5 years.
Joe Bloggs is offline  
post #753 of 839 Old 03-24-2015, 05:40 AM
 
tgm1024's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Maybe ⅓ of the way from here to there.
Posts: 10,026
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2589 Post(s)
Liked: 2312
Quote:
Originally Posted by Joe Bloggs View Post
Always have? Even in the pre-digital era?
Joe, can we set aside the pedantry? We are talking about the digital domain.
tgm1024 is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #754 of 839 Old 03-24-2015, 05:44 AM
 
tgm1024's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Maybe ⅓ of the way from here to there.
Posts: 10,026
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2589 Post(s)
Liked: 2312
Quote:
Originally Posted by Joe Bloggs View Post
NHK is the main one who has been shooting/doing test broadcasts in 7.68K - as well as partnering with the BBC. I don't know of any film companies shooting digitally at around 8K. Maybe the IMAX shot scenes in films (on film) are around that - perhaps they scan at something like that? So film companies film on film in 35mm/IMAX etc. which may sometimes (occasionally) be scanned at 8K - or is that just for archiving? But the TV comanies are the ones actually/who will actually be shooting in 7.68K.

Not necessarily. eg. if NHK broadcast 2 hours of 7.68K at 100Mb/s (ie. compressed) it would only be around 87.89GB.

Well they're going to have 7.68K TV on a regular basis in Japan (maybe other places too?) in about 5 years.
Yes. On a broader note, one of the things people seem to have the hardest time with is in accepting that existing bottlenecks (storage size, bandwidth, cpu speed, etc., etc.) do always loosen over time. I even see this within myself when helping someone manage a functional spec. I routinely catch my knee-jerk reaction when reacting to "terabytes" as some kind of "OMG, NO!" limiter, but in reality, terabytes just are not that big of a deal these days.

Last edited by tgm1024; 04-12-2015 at 07:23 AM.
tgm1024 is offline  
post #755 of 839 Old 04-12-2015, 07:25 AM
 
tgm1024's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Maybe ⅓ of the way from here to there.
Posts: 10,026
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2589 Post(s)
Liked: 2312
Wait a second. With deference to the Thread title, are people using SUHD to describe 8K?

Samsung has that as a trademark now for 4K.
tgm1024 is offline  
post #756 of 839 Old 04-12-2015, 07:42 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Joe Bloggs's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: UK
Posts: 3,114
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 446 Post(s)
Liked: 126
Quote:
Originally Posted by tgm1024 View Post
Wait a second. With deference to the Thread title, are people using SUHD to describe 8K?

Samsung has that as a trademark now for 4K.
Technicaly it's not "Octo HD" either.

Quote:
Samsung has that as a trademark now for 4K
Technically their 4K isn't 4K so they're wrong doing that too, since it's 3840x2160.

They talk about "Samsung 4K SUHD TVs". I'm not sure why later they couldn't talk about "Samsung 8K SUHD TVs" (well apart from the fact that their 4K is 3840 and 8K would be 7680 - at lot less than 8000).

Unless it's something to do with "Mark Drawing 4000 - Standard character mark Typeset" in the trademark. Would that limit it to "4K" or does the 4000 mean something else here? Is that what makes you think the SUHD trademark is limited to "4K"? Isn't that just a code - and the trademark is probably just for "SUHD" not also the letters "4K" - so it could be used for 7.68k too?

Last edited by Joe Bloggs; 04-12-2015 at 07:52 AM.
Joe Bloggs is offline  
post #757 of 839 Old 04-12-2015, 09:55 AM
 
tgm1024's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Maybe ⅓ of the way from here to there.
Posts: 10,026
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2589 Post(s)
Liked: 2312
Quote:
Originally Posted by Joe Bloggs View Post
Technicaly it's not "Octo HD" either.

Technically their 4K isn't 4K so they're wrong doing that too, since it's 3840x2160.

They talk about "Samsung 4K SUHD TVs". I'm not sure why later they couldn't talk about "Samsung 8K SUHD TVs" (well apart from the fact that their 4K is 3840 and 8K would be 7680 - at lot less than 8000).

Unless it's something to do with "Mark Drawing 4000 - Standard character mark Typeset" in the trademark. Would that limit it to "4K" or does the 4000 mean something else here? Is that what makes you think the SUHD trademark is limited to "4K"? Isn't that just a code - and the trademark is probably just for "SUHD" not also the letters "4K" - so it could be used for 7.68k too?
It's just a term. UHD became generally understood as 3840x2160, and it was in this thread that I first saw the term SUHD used as a synonym for 4 times that. So I have to wonder where common usage is falling with respect to this.

3480 vs 4096 and 7680 vs 8192 are non-issues to me. We're talking about what terms mean, and if 4K colloquially means 3840, then I'm fine with that, even though it causes confusion with the Red camera guys. What I'm not fine with is having SUHD mean both 4K and 8K.

Last edited by tgm1024; 04-12-2015 at 11:17 AM.
tgm1024 is offline  
post #758 of 839 Old 04-12-2015, 08:47 PM
 
Kaldaien's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2015
Location: Cape Coral, FL
Posts: 425
Mentioned: 8 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 306 Post(s)
Liked: 124
I didn't think this was really a problem. Super Ultra HD is the stupidest sounding marketing term I've heard in a long time, and wouldn't be caught dead uttering it aloud. I will continue to call 3840x2160 by "4K UHD" and 7680x4320 as "8K UHD", no confusion at all if you do that The other resolution known as 4K (4096x2160), I prefer to call "Cinema 4K". Those may not be official names, but everyone knows what you're talking about.

If the Koreans decided to add the word Super to a resolution specification for marketing, that's on them. Just like they created the awful phrase "LED TV" to mean the successor to CCFL backlit LCD. They seem great at creating marketing designed to confuse the average consumer.
Kaldaien is offline  
post #759 of 839 Old 04-13-2015, 07:26 AM
 
tgm1024's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Maybe ⅓ of the way from here to there.
Posts: 10,026
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2589 Post(s)
Liked: 2312
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kaldaien View Post
I didn't think this was really a problem. Super Ultra HD is the stupidest sounding marketing term I've heard in a long time, and wouldn't be caught dead uttering it aloud. I will continue to call 3840x2160 by "4K UHD" and 7680x4320 as "8K UHD", no confusion at all if you do that The other resolution known as 4K (4096x2160), I prefer to call "Cinema 4K". Those may not be official names, but everyone knows what you're talking about.

If the Koreans decided to add the word Super to a resolution specification for marketing, that's on them. Just like they created the awful phrase "LED TV" to mean the successor to CCFL backlit LCD. They seem great at creating marketing designed to confuse the average consumer.
I think you're making too much of an acronym expanded meaning. HDMI means "High Definition Multimedia Interface". No one says that out loud, they say "HDMI".
tgm1024 is offline  
post #760 of 839 Old 04-13-2015, 09:13 AM
 
Kaldaien's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2015
Location: Cape Coral, FL
Posts: 425
Mentioned: 8 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 306 Post(s)
Liked: 124
Quote:
Originally Posted by tgm1024 View Post
I think you're making too much of an acronym expanded meaning. HDMI means "High Definition Multimedia Interface". No one says that out loud, they say "HDMI".
That's even worse, though. "SUHD" sounds obscene to me Something like "SVHS" rolls off the tongue, but "SUHD" doesn't feel right at all.
Kaldaien is offline  
post #761 of 839 Old 04-13-2015, 09:28 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Joe Bloggs's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: UK
Posts: 3,114
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 446 Post(s)
Liked: 126
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kaldaien View Post
That's even worse, though. "SUHD" sounds obscene to me Something like "SVHS" rolls off the tongue, but "SUHD" doesn't feel right at all.
To me it sounds like a mix of Super-Hivision (NHK's original name for UHD / 7680x4320) and UHD.

Quote:
It's just a term. UHD became generally understood as 3840x2160
For a long time there's been 2 different ones. UHD-1=3840x2160 and UHD-2=7680x4320 (UHD-2 based on original Super-Hivision display res). For a while, other than Japan, it seemed UHD-2 was more going for cinemas, but for a while now has been intended for consumers. So UHD means both of those, though it may be currently understood as 3840x2160 just because there are very few available displays that are 7680x4320 (if any). But whoever went to see the demos of 7680x4320 would have understood it as being UHD (unless they were still calling it Super Hi-Vision then).
Joe Bloggs is offline  
post #762 of 839 Old 04-13-2015, 09:31 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
andy sullivan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: sun city west AZ
Posts: 4,370
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 954 Post(s)
Liked: 447
2K,4K, 8K. That's all you need. Pretty easy to understand and more importantly reasonably easy to explain in a basic way. Lets face it, if you're trying to give a quick explication to somebody that only wants a quick explication then 2K,4K,8K should suffice. Anything beyond that and you'll be watching their eyes glaze over.
dsinger likes this.
andy sullivan is offline  
post #763 of 839 Old 04-13-2015, 10:48 AM
 
tgm1024's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Maybe ⅓ of the way from here to there.
Posts: 10,026
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2589 Post(s)
Liked: 2312
Well again, I'm fine with 8K, but that's not my question.

Is there an accepted acronym for 7680x4320 other than "8K UHD", or "8K"? (Again, let's ignore the 8192 argument for now...it's pointless).

The "8K super hi-vision" isn't generally used outside of NHK, even though they're the pioneering force in whatever adoption has happened thus far (almost nothing).

Last edited by tgm1024; 04-13-2015 at 10:54 AM.
tgm1024 is offline  
post #764 of 839 Old 04-13-2015, 03:57 PM
 
Kaldaien's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2015
Location: Cape Coral, FL
Posts: 425
Mentioned: 8 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 306 Post(s)
Liked: 124
Quote:
Originally Posted by tgm1024 View Post
Well again, I'm fine with 8K, but that's not my question.

Is there an accepted acronym for 7680x4320 other than "8K UHD", or "8K"? (Again, let's ignore the 8192 argument for now...it's pointless).

The "8K super hi-vision" isn't generally used outside of NHK, even though they're the pioneering force in whatever adoption has happened thus far (almost nothing).
Netflix calls 1080p "Super HD", so I'm sure this is what's tripping some people up. They probably see that and assume that the convention is going to apply to UHD as well. But in the end, "super" this and "super" that is always extraordinarily vague. Super VGA implies next to nothing other than it's higher resolution than VGA.

HD, on the other hand has adopted a somewhat sensible naming convetion based on quarter/nominal/Full/Quad. 8K UHD will be marketed as Full UHD or simply 8K whenever it hits American shores.
Kaldaien is offline  
post #765 of 839 Old 04-13-2015, 10:39 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Joe Bloggs's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: UK
Posts: 3,114
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 446 Post(s)
Liked: 126
Quote:
Originally Posted by tgm1024 View Post
is there an accepted acronym for 7680x4320 other than "8k uhd", or "8k"?
uhd-2 (in uppercase - not lower - the forum changes it to lowercase)

Last edited by Joe Bloggs; 04-13-2015 at 10:44 PM.
Joe Bloggs is offline  
post #766 of 839 Old 04-14-2015, 02:42 AM - Thread Starter
AVS Forum Special Member
 
irkuck's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: cyberspace
Posts: 3,910
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 363 Post(s)
Liked: 161
And why the SUHD is new life necessity? To have a difference between what's on our walls and in our pockets since before long UHD will be in every pocket .
irkuck is offline  
post #767 of 839 Old 04-14-2015, 03:46 PM
Advanced Member
 
hungro's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 898
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 177 Post(s)
Liked: 116
Quote:
Originally Posted by tgm1024 View Post
Well again, I'm fine with 8K, but that's not my question.

Is there an accepted acronym for 7680x4320 other than "8K UHD", or "8K"? (Again, let's ignore the 8192 argument for now...it's pointless).

The "8K super hi-vision" isn't generally used outside of NHK, even though they're the pioneering force in whatever adoption has happened thus far (almost nothing).
My guess would be 4320p.
hungro is offline  
post #768 of 839 Old 04-16-2015, 09:46 AM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
fafrd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 13,237
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 14 Post(s)
Liked: 4784
In case this hasn't been posted on this thread yet: http://variety.com/2015/digital/news...ow-1201472453/

'“The 8K TV’s appropriate size is bigger than HD TVs of course, more than 4K TVs,” said Hamaguchi. “For home use, 70-inch or 85-inch is an appropriate size.” But NHK’s assumptions will seem peculiar to most consumers. According to Hamaguchi, NHK feels the appropriate viewing distance is 3/4 of the screen height. In other words, they assume that viewers watching a TV about the size he describes, with a screen about three feet tall, would sit just over two feet away from the screen two feet away from the screen. The typical living room viewing distance in the U.S. is about nine feet, and most viewers watch TVs much smaller than he describes.'

fafrd is online now  
post #769 of 839 Old 04-20-2015, 09:34 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
nathanddrews's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Minnesota
Posts: 2,029
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 622 Post(s)
Liked: 635
Quote:
Originally Posted by fafrd View Post
In case this hasn't been posted on this thread yet: http://variety.com/2015/digital/news...ow-1201472453/
I don't know about the rest of you, but with the flexible OLED technology, I would prefer to be wrapped up in an OLED like a burrito for all my video viewing. Curved screens? Pfft! I want to live INSIDE the screen!
Bruce2019 likes this.
nathanddrews is offline  
post #770 of 839 Old 04-20-2015, 09:49 AM
 
tgm1024's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Maybe ⅓ of the way from here to there.
Posts: 10,026
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2589 Post(s)
Liked: 2312
Quote:
Originally Posted by fafrd View Post
In case this hasn't been posted on this thread yet: http://variety.com/2015/digital/news...ow-1201472453/

'“The 8K TV’s appropriate size is bigger than HD TVs of course, more than 4K TVs,” said Hamaguchi. “For home use, 70-inch or 85-inch is an appropriate size.” But NHK’s assumptions will seem peculiar to most consumers. According to Hamaguchi, NHK feels the appropriate viewing distance is 3/4 of the screen height. In other words, they assume that viewers watching a TV about the size he describes, with a screen about three feet tall, would sit just over two feet away from the screen two feet away from the screen. The typical living room viewing distance in the U.S. is about nine feet, and most viewers watch TVs much smaller than he describes.'

I didn't read through that link, but I want to caution that when I've seen similar 3rd-hand claims elsewhere, what they were doing was errantly looking at the NHK charts for where the drop-off distances were, taking THAT information and assuming that NHK was actively advocating it as a viewing distance.

There is no place that NHK advocates 3/4 screen height for viewing.
tgm1024 is offline  
post #771 of 839 Old 04-23-2015, 10:40 AM
Advanced Member
 
tazz3's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: East islip N.Y
Posts: 809
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 26 Post(s)
Liked: 20
8 k is a dream we are about 12 years away from it
tazz3 is offline  
post #772 of 839 Old 04-23-2015, 12:36 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Artwood's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Hoover, Alabama
Posts: 4,849
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 61 Post(s)
Liked: 244
Does 3D start to look good at 8K?
madtapper likes this.
Artwood is offline  
post #773 of 839 Old 04-23-2015, 06:25 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Luke M's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 1,027
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 389 Post(s)
Liked: 133
Quote:
Originally Posted by fafrd View Post
In case this hasn't been posted on this thread yet: http://variety.com/2015/digital/news...ow-1201472453/

'“The 8K TV’s appropriate size is bigger than HD TVs of course, more than 4K TVs,” said Hamaguchi. “For home use, 70-inch or 85-inch is an appropriate size.” But NHK’s assumptions will seem peculiar to most consumers. According to Hamaguchi, NHK feels the appropriate viewing distance is 3/4 of the screen height. In other words, they assume that viewers watching a TV about the size he describes, with a screen about three feet tall, would sit just over two feet away from the screen two feet away from the screen. The typical living room viewing distance in the U.S. is about nine feet, and most viewers watch TVs much smaller than he describes.'
I think this sort of misses the point. 3/4 screen height is like the first row of a movie theater. Unless people actually want that kind of extreme immersion, 8K is not needed regardless of screen size.

Last edited by Luke M; 04-23-2015 at 06:32 PM.
Luke M is offline  
post #774 of 839 Old 06-04-2015, 09:56 AM - Thread Starter
AVS Forum Special Member
 
irkuck's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: cyberspace
Posts: 3,910
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 363 Post(s)
Liked: 161
Octo TV aka 8K/SUHDTV not that cool anymore: Cento TV aka 10K is roaring
irkuck is offline  
post #775 of 839 Old 06-04-2015, 10:27 AM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
Ken Ross's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: N.Y.
Posts: 33,097
Mentioned: 28 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 7301 Post(s)
Liked: 8126
^ Give me strength.
Ken Ross is offline  
post #776 of 839 Old 06-04-2015, 05:38 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Joe Bloggs's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: UK
Posts: 3,114
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 446 Post(s)
Liked: 126
Quote:
Originally Posted by irkuck View Post
Octo TV aka 8K/SUHDTV not that cool anymore: Cento TV aka 10K is roaring
At least it really has 10K worth of pixels across (10,240), unlike "8K" which only has 7.68K really. Though for pixels in height it's no more than the "8K"s - ie. it's still only 4320p since it's 21:9. And for UHD-2 broadcasts there will be black pillarbox bars on the sides.
Joe Bloggs is offline  
post #777 of 839 Old 06-04-2015, 06:00 PM
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Posts: 536
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 349 Post(s)
Liked: 59
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kaldaien View Post
I didn't think this was really a problem. Super Ultra HD is the stupidest sounding marketing term I've heard in a long time, and wouldn't be caught dead uttering it aloud. I will continue to call 3840x2160 by "4K UHD" and 7680x4320 as "8K UHD", no confusion at all if you do that The other resolution known as 4K (4096x2160), I prefer to call "Cinema 4K". Those may not be official names, but everyone knows what you're talking about.

If the Koreans decided to add the word Super to a resolution specification for marketing, that's on them. Just like they created the awful phrase "LED TV" to mean the successor to CCFL backlit LCD. They seem great at creating marketing designed to confuse the average consumer.
I think you don't have an idea of how inadequate people are in general with display technologies. When HD came out, there was FULL HD and HD and people had a hard time understanding the difference. Especially when displays cheated by overscanning. You can see it in hospitals/family owned shops, their TVs overscan and HD signal all the time.

There's still people today who didn't know that they needed HD content in order to see HD.

Oh and let's not forget how they abused "high defintion" for practically everything, like even lipstick. So people make the assumption that HD simply means it looks better.


I am not exageratting, work in information technology and you will see how technologically impaired people are in general.

Most people don't even know that their Samsung phone is an Android, but instead refer to it as a samsung when asked if they had an android or iphone "UMM... I have a samsung." is what they tell me.
Chase Payne is offline  
post #778 of 839 Old 06-09-2015, 12:42 PM - Thread Starter
AVS Forum Special Member
 
irkuck's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: cyberspace
Posts: 3,910
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 363 Post(s)
Liked: 161
irkuck is offline  
post #779 of 839 Old 06-09-2015, 01:05 PM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
Ken Ross's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: N.Y.
Posts: 33,097
Mentioned: 28 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 7301 Post(s)
Liked: 8126
Quote:
Originally Posted by irkuck View Post
Interestingly, unlike watching 4K downscaled to HD which tends to look much better than shooting the same scene in HD (you're dealing with more information for a better downscaled picture), watching this 8K downscaled to 4K, looked very unimpressive. In fact I'd call it kind of soft.
Ken Ross is offline  
post #780 of 839 Old 06-09-2015, 01:30 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Joe Bloggs's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: UK
Posts: 3,114
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 446 Post(s)
Liked: 126
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ken Ross View Post
Interestingly, unlike watching 4K downscaled to HD which tends to look much better than shooting the same scene in HD (you're dealing with more information for a better downscaled picture), watching this 8K downscaled to 4K, looked very unimpressive. In fact I'd call it kind of soft.
Though they didn't have an 8K (or 7.68K) camera - most of it was 6K or 6.1K upscaled. With some shots shot in portrait mode and stitched together in After Effects.

https://lensvid.com/gear/ghost-town-...eo-on-youtube/

But I agree it doesn't look all that detailed depending on the shot (looking from 1080p) - maybe because of the "film effect" type grading/focusing (ie. not all of shot being in focus).

Last edited by Joe Bloggs; 06-09-2015 at 01:57 PM.
Joe Bloggs is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Reply OLED Technology and Flat Panels General

Tags
Lcd Hdtv , Displays , Plasma Hdtv , Panasonic

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page


Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off